Next version of Windows to come within three years

At a field sales force conference in Orlando, Florida yesterday, Microsoft shed a little more light on its plans for the next version of Windows. The folks at CNet have the scoop thanks to “sources close to the company,” and they say Microsoft revealed its intention to release the next version of Windows “within roughly three years.”

The upcoming operating system is reportedly called “Windows 7” within the company, which suggests that Microsoft could finally be dumping the random naming scheme it introduced with Windows ME at the start of the decade. The release of Windows 7 within about three years of Vista’s introduction will reportedly be part of steps taken by Microsoft to move to a more “predictable” release schedule for new operating systems. CNet says Microsoft also reiterated that Windows 7 will ship in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions, just like Windows Vista.

Comments closed
    • wierdo
    • 12 years ago

    I don’t think I’d wanna “subscribe” to an OS, so I will have to migrate for sure this time around if they go too far with that.

    • Damage
    • 12 years ago

    I’ve nuked a number of posts for potty-mouth. If the offending users keep it up, they’ll be banned, too.

    • tesmar
    • 12 years ago

    Mods, I thought this was supposed to be a family friendly site? I am more and more not wanting to read it because of some of the language I see here.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 12 years ago

    I don’t understand why everyone freaks out about “no service packs” in the first place…it’s not like a service pack is any more than security updates anymore.

    • duffy
    • 12 years ago

    They can call it Windows 7. I prefer Windows 2012.

    • DukenukemX
    • 12 years ago

    Mac OS X for PC.

    That is all.

      • Mithent
      • 12 years ago

      Since there would then be no need to buy hardware from Apple, it won’t happen.

      • d2brothe
      • 12 years ago

      And for those of us who like to play games……

    • Ryu Connor
    • 12 years ago

    q[<....but to be honest the only thing I would like to see XP have from Vista is the sandbox isolation mode for IE that UAC provides.<]q XP has that.

    • gaffo
    • 12 years ago

    just moved to XP from 98SE only last week.

    – figure XP will be good enough for the next 9 yrs.

    Vista Smista….you can keep it.

    wake up people, when is “good enough” “Good enough”

    a. when it is actually “good enough”

    b. when you are told you must fix something that ain’t broke, buy something that you already have, get the latest and greatest that does the same thing the early version did………………….

    ………….

    its not rocket science – just common sense.

      • gerbilspy
      • 12 years ago

      So do you like XP so far?

    • IntelMole
    • 12 years ago

    Oh come on Microsoft, be brave!

    In three years time, you won’t be able to buy a 32-bit processor. Can you even buy one now (excluding ebay?). It’s also unlikely that this new OS would run to any acceptable level on any 32-bit system that is still around by then.

    So given all that, why are you even offering a 32/64-bit choice here? You realise that there is zero real incentive for people to develop 64-bit drivers at the moment for the desktop. This essentially means that you are developing a 64-bit version that no one will use on the desktop.

    If you were to instead force people to use 64-bit drivers by getting rid of the 32-bit option, you’d find that people did it without even thinking about it.

    OK, so I know that some Joe or Jane will want their 10 year old webcam to just work, but I can handle that just fine 🙂

    • SGT Lindy
    • 12 years ago

    It will happen. MS has learned its lesson with Vista. They will pull the same BS as Apple.

    Apple releases a new version of OS X every 2-3 years that has bug fixes and some updates to it…….and charges $150 for it.

    MS releases a new version Windows every 4-5 years…gives you 2-4 service packs for free that have bug fixes and updates to it.

    MS waits so long they feel they have to do some major update.

    Now they will be like apple….Windows versions every 2-3 years…no service packs but just patches for bug critcal bug fixes and charge you less for the new version.

    Just today to stiffle the “Vista SP1 beta” that was supposed to be released this week they said it was a typo…and that everyone needs to stop thinking “Service Packs” because Vista will give you updates…..just like Apple. If you get people to stop thinking service packs, and give them incremental updates via “new versions” they will buy it when it rolls out….no more wait until the first SP before moving to the new OS.

      • Gandhi
      • 12 years ago

      New Mac OS X versions (10.X.X) included new features and apps. The point releases of those versions (10.4.X for Tiger, for example) are like service packs.

      • A_Pickle
      • 12 years ago

      The only Windows release that took 5 years was between XP and Vista — otherwise, Windows has been “improving” in the same manner as has Mac OS X. Except Microsoft doesn’t charge you $150 for a service pack…

      • blastdoor
      • 12 years ago

      And apple doesn’t charge $400 for the “real” version of the OS, either. And apple doesn’t require activation. And they have a very reasonably priced “family pack” license for 5 computers at $500 (if you’re into licenses). And Apple has had 10 or 11 point releases for free for Tiger (the point releases are like mini service packs).

        • Gandhi
        • 12 years ago

        OS X family packs sell for $199, not $499.

          • blastdoor
          • 12 years ago

          Thanks — I don’t know where that came from, must have been a typo/brain freeze.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 12 years ago

      For your analogy to be correct, you’d have to look at any version of OS X and not be able to tell which version you’re looking at; after all, a service pack is generally just a combination of security fixes and whatnot.

      Just install OS X 10.0 or 10.1 on a Mac and then install 10.4 to see what was missing initially that’s there today. The $130 (not $150) is absolutely worth it in every case (and the one time it wasn’t really worth it, it was free – going from 10.0 to 10.1).

        • A_Pickle
        • 12 years ago

        Yes, every time it’s been worth it. I mean, you CLEARLY couldn’t have gotten widgets, desktop search, and RSS feeds from free applications (Konfabulator, Google Desktop Search, Firefox) on the Mac. That was DEFINITELY worth $130!!

    • bdwilcox
    • 12 years ago

    Not to beat a dead horse, but Windows 7 will essentially be Vista SP3.

      • A_Pickle
      • 12 years ago

      Whoa, wait, but isn’t Vista just XP SP3? So… Windows 7 would be XP SP4? And isn’t XP just Windows 2000 SP5?

      Fuck you, Microsoft. You don’t get to decide what you call a new operating system, that’s up to me — the bitchy, irritable, and never-satisfied-when-you-deliver-another-yet-dominant-product consumer!

      Now give me a damn Windows version.

    • robg1701
    • 12 years ago

    I dont see why they cant manage this. It will be a massage of the vista code, so that should speed thigns up…..and despite the fact it took them so long sine XP to relase, they did effectively restart vista from scratch in 2004, meaning they completed it in under 3 years.

      • Gandhi
      • 12 years ago

      You assume Microsoft won’t do the same with Windows 7

    • paulWTAMU
    • 12 years ago

    If they actually do manage that, odds are better than even that I’ll never use Vista–not out of any inherent hate for it, just for lack of a reason to upgrade before the next three years is up.

      • alex666
      • 12 years ago

      My thought exactly, not for me, as I’m already using Vista Home Premium (I got a great deal on it and actually like it a lot, as it is very fast), but for a lot of folks. I suspect the biggest change to Windows 7 will be the file system that was supposed to be added to Vista. And in that sense, it will almost be Vista SP3.

    • Sniper
    • 12 years ago

    Windows Media Player 7

    • Gandhi
    • 12 years ago

    I’ll believe it when I see it in retail package. Until then, they can spew whatever crap they want – it ain’t happening.

    • Peldor
    • 12 years ago

    Windows 7? So which versions since 3.11 didn’t count?

    4 -> NT4?
    5 -> 95?
    6 -> 98?
    7 -> ME?
    8 -> XP?
    9 -> Vista?

    Maybe they should call it MS OS X.

    • packfan_dave
    • 12 years ago

    I’m going to confidently predict that 32-bit Windows 7 workstation will be nearly impossible to get unless you live in a 3rd-world country or have an MSDN subscription (and will really essentially be the last service pack for 32-bit Vista with the Windows 7 UI tacked on). 32-bit Windows 7 server just won’t exist.

    • heruur
    • 12 years ago

    Will 32bit OSes even exist in 3 years…

    • ew
    • 12 years ago

    It may be called Windows 7 internally but to consumers it will be known as Vista ME.

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 12 years ago

      Now is Vista ME, the next version is Vista XP.

        • A_Pickle
        • 12 years ago

        HAHA LOL LETS MAYK FUN OF TEH MIKROSOFT CUZ WE CAN HAH

          • Convert
          • 12 years ago

          /Sneaks up behind A_Pickle and injects him with tranquilizer

      • Hance
      • 12 years ago

      And here I though Vista was the new version of ME

    • WallisHall
    • 12 years ago

    Personally I think thats silly. The more I look at Vista, the more I see that NOTHING was changed under the hood.
    Hell, Office 2007 is the same way. they tacked this fancy Ribbon on the top and claimed it’s all new, but if you look all of the old screens are there just this stupid PITA Ribbon tacked on the top.

    Tired of a “new version” that is just crap on the top of crap.

    • cobalt
    • 12 years ago

    That’s amusing. If they pull it off, I might happen to skip Vista altogether! (Though, along with many others here, my skepticism remains firmly in place.)

      • Thresher
      • 12 years ago

      The sad thing is that so might quite a few enterprise customers.

    • Logdan
    • 12 years ago

    The next version would be Windows 7 (7.0, Build 7000).

    Lucky 7’s. 🙂

    • Thresher
    • 12 years ago

    I’m not sure I would hold my breath on that.

    • Shinare
    • 12 years ago

    “Windows 7″…? that just doesn’t sound right. I would be surprised. But then again, I thought “Vista” sounded a little fruity.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This